“The end justifies the means” is among the more controversial adages, with ranging positions of full and situational agreement versus complete disagreement. This form of ethical reasoning associates the morality of actions to their intent, classifying decisions as “right” or “wrong” according to the separately determined moral quality of the result. Theoretically it is impossible not to have an opinion on the idea; even from an early age, a child will often attempt to justify himself in wrongdoing by determining the reward worth the risk. Age adds nuance to the argument, but the concept never fully fades out of mind. Almost any action that can be deemed questionable inevitably becomes judged by someone according to its goals.
Consider these scenarios of varying ethical complexity:
– A man who is late to work chooses to drive over the speed limit; he believes reaching his destination sooner is worth the risk he may pose to other drivers.
– A woman who cannot afford food for her family chooses to steal it; she believes the well-being of her family necessitates the seizure of other’s property.
– A man being threatened with bodily harm by another individual chooses to retaliate in kind; he believes his self-preservation justifies him to inflict injury upon his attacker.
These are easily conceptualized examples, and may bring to mind more personal ones as well. How often in our own lives do we weigh risks against rewards as a moral compass, even unconsciously?
The Bible describes a very different standard — “For no good tree bears bad fruit, nor again does a bad tree bear good fruit, for each tree is known by its own fruit. For figs are not gathered from thornbushes, nor are grapes picked from a bramble bush. The good person out of the good treasure of his heart produces good, and the evil person out of his evil treasure produces evil, for out of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaks.” (Luke 6:43-45) Sin is defined as that which is contrary to God, a rebellion of spirit which exhibits itself through action. Thus, morality is concerned with the heart, and whether something is justifiable is determined independent of the action itself; it is not the end that justifies the means, but the beginning.
An important clarification should be made against the presumption that any action could be potentially justified by good intentions. This interpretation of the Biblical standard is actually a return to the first argument, and ignores their core principle of Godliness. The morality of an action is truly defined by its consistency with the character of God within the heart; this means an otherwise “good” action can be done sinfully, but does not imply the inverse. To truly know the morality of a situation, one must know God.
Be of integrity. TTT